ReviewJournal of clinical and experimental dentistry2026
Vertebral Cervical Fusion in Individuals with and without Open Bite: A Comparative Matched Study.
Review in Journal of clinical and experimental dentistry, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background: This study aims to evaluate the presence of cervical vertebral fusion in individuals with an open bite compared to those without, matched by skeletal relationship, age, and sex. Material and Methods: This matched-comparative study analyzed 234 lateral head radiographs, dividing the subjects into two groups. The open-bite group consisted of 117 patients (69 women and 48 men; average age 24.05 ± 12.5 years), while the control group included an equal number of individuals with a similar gender ratio (average age 23.79 ± 11.95 years). Both groups were matched based on their skeletal relationship, specifically the ANB angle. A trained and calibrated radiologist conducted a visual assessment of the cervical spine using lateral cephalometric radiographs for each subject. The study evaluated the presence of simple fusion and block fusion. Statistical analyses were performed using the Chi-square test and binary logistic regression (p < 0.05). Results: The incidence of simple fusion was higher in the control group (35%) compared to the open-bite group (26.5%). A small number of cases (2.6%) of block fusion were found only in the anterior open-bite group. However, these differences did not reach statistical significance (p = 0.096). Additionally, no significant influences were identified regarding sex, age, group, or ANB angle (p > 0.05). Conclusions: There were no differences in the overall prevalence of cervical fusions between individuals with anterior open bite and those without. However, the finding that block fusions occurred exclusively in the open-bite group underscores the importance of evaluating the cervical spine, as it may affect the individual's head position.
Identifiers
What Socratic holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the Socratic graph.